
95% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
CORRECTION article
Front. Psychol. , 16 March 2016
Sec. Developmental Psychology
Volume 7 - 2016 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00342
This article is part of the Research Topic Linguistic Influences on Mathematics View all 19 articles
This article is a correction to:
Linguistic influence on mathematical development is specific rather than pervasive: revisiting the Chinese Number Advantage in Chinese and English children
by Mark, W., and Dowker, A. (2015). Front. Psychol. 6:203. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00203
Due to an oversight, the two sentences preceding the final sentence in the abstract should be changed to read: Results indicated that students in HK-C were better at counting backward than those in HKE, who were in turn better than the UK students. However, there was no statistical difference in counting forward or place value understanding. Children in both Hong Kong schools performed better at the arithmetic test than the UK children. Among the older group, the HK-C children performed better on the arithmetic test than the HK-E children, but no such difference was found in the younger group.
The authors apologize for this mistake.
This error does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way.
All authors listed, have made substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Keywords: linguistic transparency, counting system, arithmetic, cross-cultural, Chinese Number Advantage
Citation: Mark W and Dowker A (2016) Corrigendum: Linguistic influence on mathematical development is specific rather than pervasive: revisiting the Chinese Number Advantage in Chinese and English children. Front. Psychol. 7:342. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00342
Received: 20 February 2016; Accepted: 24 February 2016;
Published: 16 March 2016.
Edited and reviewed by: Yvette Renee Harris, Miami University, USA
Copyright © 2016 Mark and Dowker. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Ann Dowker, YW5uLmRvd2tlckBwc3kub3guYWMudWs=
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.